Natarajan vs State By on 21 August, 2018

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Natarajan vs State By on 21 August, 2018

Bench: P.Velmurugan

        

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS 

DATED: 21.08.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

                            Criminal Revision No.1329  of 2014
                                       

Natarajan					      .. 	Petitioner/Accused
							
			 	   Vs

State by
Station House Officer,
Katterikuppam Police Station,
Puducherry.
Crime No.123 of 2008.			  		      ..    Respondent/Complainant

          Prayer:-  Criminal Revision filed under Sections 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to call for the records and set aside the order dated 03.09.2014 made in Crl.M.P.No.4053 of 2014 in C.C.No.583 of 2008 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry and  allow the revision petition.

              For Petitioner		         : Mr.M.Palanivel                                                             

		For  Respondent      : Mr.V.Balamurugan,					                                       Additional Public Prosecutor 
                                                [Pondicherry]

                                               * * * * *




	         O R D E R

The present criminal revision has been filed to set aside the order dated 03.09.2014 made in Crl.M.P.No.4053 of 2014 in C.C.No.583 of 2008 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry and allow the revision petition.

2.The facts leading to the filing of this revision are as follows:-

On 14.09.2008 at about 8.45 hours, one Damodaran residing at Hospital Road, Katterikuppam negligently allowed one Natarajan, who is residing at No.17-A, Vanoli Street, Katterikuppam at Ramamurthy, Reddiyar's Land, Katterikuppam, without taking safety measure to trim teak wood branches and thereby he got electric shock and died. Hence, one Sagadevan @ Paramasivam, the brother of the deceased, lodged a complaint before the Sub Inspector of Police, Katterikuppam Police Station, Puducherry. On receipt of the said complaint, the Sub Inspector of Police, Katterikuppam Police Station, Puducherry after completing the investigation, filed a charge sheet under Section 304(A) IPC before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry in C.C.No.583 of 2008.

3.At that time, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 239 Cr.P.C. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry, after elaborately discussing the facts and circumstances of the case and after considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel on either side, held that charge sheet has been filed under Section 304(A) IPC and in this case, the accused was questioned under Section 251 Cr.P.C and pending for trial. The learned Magistrate has further held that it is a summons case and the provision under Section 239 Cr.P.C related only to warrant cases. Hence, the learned Magistrate dismissed the petition stating that the provision under Section 239 Cr.P.C. could not be made applicable to this case.

4.Admittedly, the offence is under Section 304(A) IPC and it is a summons case. Therefore, there is no necessity to frame the charge in the summons case. Under such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate and there is no merit in the civil revision petition.

In the result, the Criminal Revision fails and accordingly, the same is dismissed. The order passed in Crl.M.P.No.4053 of 2014 in P.VELMURUGAN,J cla C.C.No.583 of 2008 dated 03.09.2014 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry is hereby confirmed.

21.08.2018 cla Index:Yes/ No Internet: Yes/No To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Puducherry.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Puducherry.

Crl.R.C.No.1329 of 2014

P.VELMURUGAN,J cla Crl.R.C.No.1329 of 2014 21.08.2018

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court